See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/263136198

The role of management consultancy in implementing operations

management in the public sector

Article in International Journal of Operations & Production Management · November 2013

DOI: 10.1108/IJOPM-07-2010-0202

CITATIONS READS
36 5,239

2 authors:

Zoe Radnor Joe O'Mahoney

The University of Law Cardiff University
107 PUBLICATIONS 7,283 CITATIONS 50 PUBLICATIONS 719 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Zoe Radnor on 05 April 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/0144-3577.htm

Role of
The role of management management
consultancy in implementing consultancy
operations management
1555
in the public sector
Received 30 July 2010
Zoe Radnor Revised 13 April 2011
School of Business and Economics, Loughborough University, 2 March 2012
Loughborough, UK 26 March 2012
Accepted 27 March 2012
Joe O’Mahoney
Cardiff Business School, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK

Abstract
Purpose – This paper reflects on the growing trend of engaging management consultancies in
implementing operations management innovations in the public sector. Whilst the differences between
public and private sector operations have been documented, there is a dearth of material detailing the impact
of public sector engagements on the consultancies themselves and the operations management products and
services they develop. Drawing on qualitative data, the paper aims to identify both the impact of operations
management in the public sector and the impact of this engagement on the consultancies that are involved.
Design/methodology/approach – This paper draws on rich, qualitative data from six large
management consultancies, amounting to over 48 interviews. An inductive methodology sought to identify
both how consultancies have adapted their operations management products and services, and why.
Findings – The paper finds that the different context of the public sector provides consultants with
considerable challenges when implementing operations management projects. The research shows
that public services are often hampered by different cultures, structures, and managerial knowledge
and investment patterns. Such constraints have an impact on both the projects being implemented and
the relationship between consultants and clients.
Originality/value – There are few studies that consider the implementation of operations management
in the public sector and fewer still which examine the impact of public sector engagement on the products
that consultancies develop. This paper aims to develop understanding in both. At a more theoretical level,
the paper contributes to considering operations management through knowledge management literature
in seeking to understand how consumers of management knowledge influence its producers.
Keywords Public sector, Lean, Knowledge management, Process management,
Management consultancy
Paper type Research paper

1. Introduction
This paper seeks to contribute to the theme of this special issue by exploring the
intersection of two important trends in operations management: the growing influence
of management consultants on operations management methods and the increased use
of such methods in the public sector. These trends intersect in a highly visible arena International Journal of Operations &
since the “efficiency agenda” introduced by many Western governments has, somewhat Production Management
Vol. 33 No. 11/12, 2013
ironically, lead to a growing trend in public spending on management consultancies to pp. 1555-1578
help implement these reforms (Boyne et al., 2003). In the UK, for example, the operational q Emerald Group Publishing Limited
0144-3577
efficiency report (HM Treasury, 2009) stipulated that potential savings of around DOI 10.1108/IJOPM-07-2010-0202
IJOPM £10 billion a year should be achieved over the next three years. In order to achieve this,
33,11/12 public sector organisations have sought to introduce a range of operations management
approaches including Lean thinking, Six Sigma and business process reengineering
(BPR) (Radnor, 2010). The evidence of the implementation of process management and
improvement methodologies includes health (Guthrie, 2006; Fillingham, 2007), central
government (Radnor and Bucci, 2007) and local government (Office of the Deputy Prime
1556 Minister, 2005). As public sector managers rarely have the resources or skills to
implement such programmes themselves, they have increasingly looked towards
management consultancies to support them in their efforts (MCA, 2010).
A review of the literature in this area highlights (at least) two under-developed areas in
our understanding of this intersection. On the one hand, there is the question of how
operations management methods and tools which consultancies have often developed for
the private sector translate into the public sector. Previous insights have shown that the
transfer of tools, concepts and programmes from the private sector can be problematic in
public sector organisations which are “based much more on values, ethical and
professional concepts and have to address many more issues than [those in the private
sector]” (Diefenbach, 2009, p. 895). Whilst several studies have shown the impact, and
limitations, of private sector tools and methods on public sector workers (Boyne, 2002)
there is relatively little literature that specifically focuses on the consultancy experience
of such transfers. Thus, in order to gain an insight into the important contextual
processes which underpin such interventions, our first research question asks:
RQ1. How do operations management consultancy interventions in the public
sector differ to those in the private sector?
A second area of consideration concerns the impact of public sector engagements on the
methods and services that consultancies develop. In the literature concerning the knowledge
developed by management consultancies there has been an increasing focus on both the
ways in which consultancies commodify knowledge into formal products (Fincham, 1995;
Suddaby and Greenwood, 2001; Clegg et al., 2004; Heusinkveld and Benders, 2005; Haas,
2006) and the manner in which such consulting services are implemented in client contexts
(Fincham and Roslender, 2004; Sturdy et al., 2009; Nicolai et al., 2010). However, what has
been less well understood is the way in which client-consultant interactions in different
contexts have an impact on the ways in which knowledge is developed. To this end, we ask:
RQ2. How does the public sector context influence the development of operations
management consulting?
The data to support this analysis is generated though semi-structured interviews with
over 48 management consultants from six large management consultancies firms.
Perhaps, unsurprisingly, we found that there were significant differences in the type
and style of engagement between public and private sector organisations. These
included the levels of organisational bureaucracy, the role of procurement, the skills
and autonomy of client managers and their attitudes to risk. These findings are
interpreted against the theoretical backdrop of the knowledge literature, specifically
through a three-stage model examining client contexts, consultant-client relationships
and operation management consultancy development. Our central insight is to show
how the public sector context exerts a commodifying influence on the consultancy
service. The findings help in creating an understanding of the development and use of
operations management by consultants and, within public services. By drawing on the Role of
knowledge literature the research and paper also contributes to the much needed management
theoretical development of operations management (Taylor and Taylor, 2009).
To achieve this, the paper first provides a review of operations and process consultancy
implementations in the context of the public sector showing not only that, such
programmes are increasingly common but also that consultancies have growing
popularity in supporting such interventions. Next, drawing on knowledge 1557
commodification literature, the paper outlines the theoretical framework used to
structure our findings. Subsequently, the paper introduces the research methodology:
an inductive and qualitative enquiry at six large UK consultancies undertaking process
management interventions in the public sector. Using this data, the paper then identifies
the changes that have occurred to consultancies, their products and the reasons why
these changes have happened by reflecting on the use of operations and process
management in the public sector. Finally, the paper considers the findings, arguing that
the public sector engagements have an important impact on the operations management
products that are generated by consultancies. This section considers how this impact
might be theorised and the consequences for future research.

2. Operations and process management consultancy in the public sector

The UK has been a rich source of information about public sector reform over the last
two decades providing a valuable context in which to explore how and why practices
are adapted or adopted across a whole institutional field (Boyne et al., 2003). In the UK,
18 per cent of the workforce are employed in the public sector (MacGregor, 2001) with
around half of the workforce, or 2.8 million, working in local government and
1.5 million in the health services (Massey, 2005). Over the last 15 years, under pressure
to cut costs and increase quality due to policies supported by Gershon (2004) review
and the efficiency agenda (HM Treasury, 2008), UK public sector organisations have
witnessed a transformation in their structures, strategies and management (Pollitt and
Bouckaert, 2004). Central to this transformation has been the introduction of a wide
range of service innovations from strategic tools (Llewellyn and Tappin, 2003;
Williams and Lewis, 2008) and operational transformations (Silvester et al., 2004;
Radnor and Boaden, 2008) to a more generalised shift in discourses of service and
professionalism (Davies, 2007).
In seeking to support such transformations, many public sector organisations have
turned to the expertise and legitimacy offered by management consultancies
(Saint-Martin, 2000). The result has been a growth in public spending on
consultancies to the point where it now represents a global average of 19 per cent of
consultancy revenues (Gross and Poor, 2008), or $57 billion (Kennedy Information, 2008).
This represents a decade of phenomenal growth for the industry – in the UK the market
grew in double digits each year 2002-2005, increasing revenue from £562 million in 2001
to £158 billion in 2005 (MCA, 2006). The resulting impact, both positive and negative, of
consultancy innovations on the public sector has been explored in some detail by
academics (Lapsley and Oldfield, 2001; Saint-Martin, 2004; Christensen, 2005),
journalists (Craig and Brooks, 2006) and government watchdogs (National Audit
Office, 2006; Public Accounts Committee, 2007). Yet cost reductions are not the only
reason for the growth in the use of consultancies. Many new governments have faced
strong opposition from their own civil servants and public sector workers to
IJOPM proposed reforms. The use of consultants was used, in the early 2000s, as an explicit
33,11/12 strategy to by-pass bureaucratic resistance and enable quicker reform (Saint-Martin,
2004; Craig and Brooks, 2006) (Figure 1 and Table I).
There are good reasons to think that the public sector poses different challenges to
consultancies than their traditional clients in the private sector. The sector posses a
number of differences (Table II) which, might suggest differing outcomes for both clients
1558 and consultants. Comparing the two sectors, “from the bottom up” at a basic level,
managerial requirements are similar between the two sectors (e.g. management of human
resources, budget, project management, service delivery, etc). However, from a
“top-down” perspective, democratic values, ministerial/politics, laws and rights shape a
much different picture of managerial requirements (Savoie, 2003; Good, 2004). Often the
accepted role of the private sector is to engage in commercial enterprise, for profit.
Firms are generally free to engage or not engage, purchase inputs at the market price and
abandon activities at will. Principally accountable to their owners, business is held
accountable by the market against several “hard” indicators especially profitability

2,500

1,968 1,968
2,000 1,865
1,734
1,584 1,614
1,500
1,279

1,000
562 605
500 384
Figure 1.
Growth in UK public 0
sector spend on 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
consultancy (£m)
Source: MCA (2010)

2008 fee income (£k) 2009 fee income (£k) % change 2008-2009

Central government
591,680 546,102 28
Local government
240,141 267,705 11
Defence
173,335 206,649 19
NHS, exac agencies & NDPBs
445,884 438,142 22
Other a
517,382 509,800 21
a
Table I. Note: Other includes: education (including further and higher education), devolved administrations,
UK public sector spend public corporations and non-UK governments
on consultants Source: MCA (2010)
Issue Private sector Public sector

Overall direction Profit Government/minister establish directions

Some attention on future profit Long term frequently limited to next election
Subject to contradictory pressures
Highly adversarial relations between political parties
Direction may be at policy not administrative level
Legislative and judicial Minimum set of law constraining all business (tax, Citizen “rights”
environmental, employment, etc.) Government managers must conform to legislation regardless of costs
Generally subject to scrutiny by legislative oversight groups or even judicial orders
Authority Authority is generally invested in one CEO Authority is often shared between senior officers/mangers and professional people
Can operate in any sector/market (politicians, lawyers, doctors/surgeons, academics, etc.)
Limited authority to expand/contract “sphere of operations” and to disengage from
activities which are not meeting current goals
Overall goal Profit Create and sustain citizen satisfaction
Application is also measured by in/decrease in net returns Economic, efficiency and effective
on capital invested and shareholder/economic value added Value for money
Ethical and equitable
General culture Profit based Values based
Entrepreneurial Bureaucratic
Managerial style matches business needs Risk adverse
Innovative
Quicker decision making
Account-ability Through clear objectives Central agencies, parliament/politicians, citizen
Owners, shareholders Information generally “acquirable” (e.g. access to information laws)
Legal reporting requirement Role of media
Primary stakeholder Shareholder is dominant stakeholder Conflicting and shifting stakeholder interests and dominance
Potential with conflict with government policy
Public media opinions influence decision making
Role of information Most held in internally and remains confidential Exposure to intense public scrutiny – “managing in a fishbowl”
Access to Information Act – managers must, and do, consider every memo, letter,
briefing note, presentation and e-mail a public document
Consideration must always be given to public perception and the potential for
political embarrassment, even for logical and sensible decisions
Budgets Flexible, based on expected profit, ROI, EVA Relatively fixed, stable budgets
Budgets subject to significant changes Frequently budget based on previous year plus inflationary adjustment
Source: Various including Rainey et al. (1976), Allison (1997) and Box (1999)
consultancy
management

Key differences between

sectors
the private and public
1559

Table II.
Role of
IJOPM (Steward and Walsh, 1994). Whereas the key purpose of public services is to undertake
33,11/12 activities in the areas where profit cannot be made, but the interests of society demand
that the activities occur (Drucker, 1993; Box, 1999). Unlike the private sector, Smith (1995)
argues public sector services must continue to operate however difficult the local
environment, sometimes delivering nationally and regionally. Furthermore, Kelly et al.
(2002) suggest that most public sector enterprises have multiple objectives with no single
1560 “bottom-line”. Even though financial indicators and ratios are widely used in the private
sector with ratios permitting comparisons between choices and market accountability
within the public sector, profit is an oxymoron (Johnson and Broms, 2000). Therefore,
often financial indicators and ratios have limited application and receive effective little
executive attention within government. This lack of use and monitoring of data could
potentially have an impact on the justification of investment and resources required by
operations management programmes such as Lean and will be explored later in the paper.
Given the differences between the two sectors, the application of operations and
process management tools without appropriate adaptation for public service
organisations has been questioned (Radnor and Walley, 2008). Other authors argue that
service characteristics are not an excuse for avoiding manufacturing methodologies as a
means of efficiency gains (Levitt, 1972): any organization can gain substantial benefits
from at least some new practices (Waterson and Clegg, 1997) whatever the size or sector of
the organization (Swank, 2003). So, whilst engagement with the public sector has provided
consultancies with considerably different engagements to that which they find in private
arenas, the question of how this has impacted the relations of knowledge and practice has
not been considered or theorised. In the next section, we draw on theories of knowledge
consumption and production to suggest possibilities for progress in understanding the
implementation of operations and process management into the public sector.

3. Theorising knowledge engagements

The literature that seeks to understand the creation, dissemination and implementation
of management knowledge has developed considerably over the last 15 years
(Benders et al., 1998; Heusinkveld and Benders, 2005). Within this field, consultants have
been categorised, along with business schools and management gurus, as “knowledge
entrepreneurs” who develop ambiguous, yet attractive products and services for
consumption by a variety of users (Fosstenløkken et al., 2003; Heusinkveld et al., 2009).
Consultancies specifically have been singled out for significant attention in their role in
disseminating operations management innovations such as BPR, Lean and TQM
(Fincham, 1999; O’Mahoney, 2007). Within this literature one can identify three-stages
that have received attention in understanding the generation, dissemination and
implementation of consultancies products in client contexts (Table III).
In the first-stage, academics have examined the processes of service development and
noted the political and social struggles which characterise the development of new
consultancy repertoires or services (Benders et al., 1998; Clark, 2004; Heusinkveld and
Benders, 2005), for example, describing the processes of “commodification” that take place
in order to make knowledge more attractive to consumers (Fincham, 1995; Suddaby and
Greenwood, 2001). In the second-stage, studies focus on the relationships consultants have
with clients emphasising both the sales activities of consultants and their interactions
with clients in defining projects. These studies have not only looked at the different roles
consultants as magicians (Fincham, 1999), missionaries (Wright et al., 2004) or preachers
 Role of
Service Development Relationships Client Contexts management
consultancy
Focus The creation and borrowing The persuasion of clients to The modification and
of new management ideas purchase consultancy translation of generic
and their commodification products products into client-specific 1561
into saleable products projects
Authors Suddaby and Greenwood Fincham (1999), Clark and Clegg et al. (2004), Furusten Table III.
(2001), Heusinkveld and Salaman (1996), Wright and and Werr (2005), Hislop (2002) A three-stage model of
Benders (2005), Clark (2004), Kitay (2004), Whittle (2006), the effects of consultants
Benders et al. (1998) Alvesson et al. (2009) on clients

(Whittle, 2006), but also emphasise the power relationships between consultants and
clients that structure the interactions (Clark et al., 1996; Wright et al., 2004; Alvesson et al.,
2009). Finally, studies examine what happens when consultancy innovations “land” at
client sites and are implemented into client contexts. Here, the focus is on the political
negotiations, social disruptions and translation effects that occur when implementing a
new idea in a specific context (Hislop, 2002; Clegg et al., 2004).
What is missing from the model (Table III) is the issue of reverse causality: the impact
of differing client contexts and relationships on the services that consultancies develop.
There are only a handful of academics that have acknowledged the possibility of reverse
flows of influence in consultant – client relationships. Heusinkveld et al. (2009) for
example emphasise the “market scanning” activities that consultants undertake when
developing new products. However, we can find no research that examines the impact of
different client sectors on the products and services that operations management
consultants develop. We believe therefore that studying the influence of public sector
clients on the consultancies they use is an important and promising arena for
investigation. In the next section, therefore, we detail the methods by which this topic
was examined.

4. Methodology
Our study is of an exploratory nature as we are looking into how concepts were being
applied into a new context and so are interested in how contextual factors modulate that
implementation and have effects upon the creation, dissemination and implementation of
management knowledge. Therefore, a case-study approach was taken, as this ensures
the ability to assess the organisational dynamics of the implementations at multiple
levels simultaneously (Yin, 1993; Voss et al., 2002). Six large consultancies were identified
which have implemented process management solutions within the public sector.
Three of the organisations are dedicated management consultancy firms whilst the other
three deploy management consultancy as part of their portfolio of activities. However, all
are and have been engaged with public sector clients and perceive them to be a growing
revenue stream. Table IV gives an outline of the organisations and who was interviewed.
In total 48 interviews were conducted across the six organisations with senior
partners, directors and consultants who had responsibility for development and delivery
of operations and process management products and services in public services in order
to seek how they understood themselves in their construction of the delivery of
IJOPM
Name Size Markets Interviews
33,11/12
Consultancy 450 consultants Energy and utilities Eight interviews:
A: management Banking and finance partners, principal
consultancy; it Public sector consultants; senior
operations Healthcare consultants; consultants
1562 Manufacturing
Telecommunications
Consultancy C: 3,500 consultants in total Retail 12 interviews including
operational excellence in the group Energy and utilities the vice president,
Financial services managing consultants
Healthcare and principals
Manufacturing
Public sector
Telecommunications
Transportation
Consultancy P: 1,900 consultants in total Communications Five interviews with
management in the group Defence senior partners and
consultancy, operations Energy directors
management Financial services
Government and
public services
Healthcare
Manufacturing
Transport
Consultancy F: business 100 consultants (but part Central government Four interviews with
service, operational of larger group who offer Defence senior partners and
excellence other services beyond Financial services directors
consultancy) Local government
Retail
Transportation
Telecommunications
Utilities
Consultancy U: 200 þ consultants in UK Healthcare and life 15 interviews including
operational performance (but part of larger group financial managing director and
and transformation who offer other services Services senior consultants
beyond consultancy) Government
Utilities
Consumer and retail
Manufacturing
Rail
Consultancy I: business 200 consultants (but part Aerospace and Four interviews with
services of larger group who offer automotive senior partners and
other services beyond Banking and finance directors
consultancy) Education
Electronics
Government and
healthcare
Table IV. Insurance
Outline of case study Retail
management
Transport
consultancies
the product. All consultants interviewed had experience of both private and public Role of
sector clients. An interview schedule was developed which asked a set of questions management
related to the implementation of operation and process management products in general
in public services and then asking about one, often Lean, in more detail. consultancy
The research focused on RQ1 and RQ2. To support this enquiry, the following
interview questions were asked related to the three-stages outlined in Table III.
1563
Service development
.
Would you describe (management consultancy offering) as a product? Give an
outline of what this product is?
.
How has this product been amended for the public sector? Were changes
intentionally planned or did changes simply evolve?
.
Have and do you change your language and the material used?

Client relationships
.
Considering the implementation of (management consultancy offering): do you
work differently in the public sector: in the consultancy team, in relation to your
consulting company and in relation to the client?
.
Considering the implementation of (management consultancy offering): what
different expectations do clients have of you as a person in the public and private
sectors? How does this make you feel?

Client contexts
.
Give up to three differences you have found between selling and implementing
this product in the public and private sector?
.
What has happened to (management consultancy offering) when you have
implemented it in and across clients?
.
Have clients spread the product within their own and to other organizations?
.
Did it fizzle out in some companies/sites? If so, which ones?

Where necessary, these questions were followed up by delving into issues that
emerged. All interviews were transcribed and additional “reflective notes” were
developed during the case study. The transcribed interviews were rigorously coded
and classified using the six step procedure (Radnor, 2002). Radnor’s technique for
analysing and interpreting data follows six key steps:
(1) topic ordering;
(2) constructing categories;
(3) reading for content;
(4) completing coded sheets;
(5) generating coded transcripts; and
(6) analysis to interpretation.

Radnor’s (2002) data analysis approach is designed for the researcher to code whilst
allowing the qualitative data to be linked, shaped and searched. Through using
IJOPM this method of analysis a level of sensitivity to detail and context can be enabled,
33,11/12 as well as accurate access to information. This method of interpretation permits
rigorous searching for patterns, building of theories or explanations and grounding them
in data (Eisenhardt, 1989). To ensure validation of the findings case study reports were
produced for each organisation which was presented to senior management.

1564 5. Findings
The findings will be presented under the key themes from the interviews and
related to the stages in Table III: service development, client relationships and client
contexts.

5.1 Service development: products for public services

We found that the majority of respondents did not feel what they offered was a “product”
but an “offering” or “approach”. However, they were very clear that something was sold
to a client which was often described as a set of principles and ideas enacted through a
set of tools:
It can be a product when we take it externally, but it’s more of a whole offering (Managing
Director, Consultancy C).
If you asked me to describe it in as package I’d say it was more of a philosophy (Consultant,
Consultancy U).
Interesting, many of consultants stated that they would like clients to see what they
sell to be an offering, more than tools, a package which influences the behaviour or
practices of an organisation:
It’s a philosophy and way of working which is unpinned by a set of tools and techniques; so
it’s more around a philosophy and principles – but there are tools (Director, Consultancy U).
That’s how I would describe it, personally; a philosophy, something, reference points to be
able to look to as well (Consultant, Consultancy U).
When asked if the product or offering was amended for public services the answer
often was that the principles or the essence of the offering stayed the same whatever
the organisation. However, the tools and techniques changed depending on the client
and the situation. For public services in particular there was a feeling that some
translation was needed in order to create an understanding of the principles and
concepts. Overall, the fundamentals of the offering were adhered to:
It is the practical applications, rather than fundamental philosophies or approach that
changes dramatically (Consultant, Consultancy U).
The changes are more on a tool rather than on a principle level (Consultant, Consultancy P).
Another important factor was the bigger role of procurement in sourcing consultancy
services for the public sector (O’Mahoney, 2007). Several consultants suggested that
dealing with procurers, rather than client managers, meant that services became more
commodified and were more focused on cost reduction:
Procurers tend to force you to remove the bells and whistles [this] means you create a simpler
and cheaper product [. . .] aimed at them rather than the managers (Consultant,
Consultancy A).
 Procurement, especially e-procurement, means sales becomes much more of a box-ticking Role of
exercise rather than a conversation [. . .] compared to the private sector you know you’ll often
be compared on cost (Partner, Consultancy A). management
consultancy
5.2 Client relationship management
The consultants were then asked if they worked differently in public services.
In particular, did they change their language and material? The responses were that 1565
although the offering did not change the vast majority felt that they changed their
language and material, often just for training, to suit the need and context of the client.
This was for all clients not just public services and was important to do so:
Certainly your language does change. You know, you have to take time to understand the
environment that you’re working in and align yourself with that environment. The material
would change, as well, I guess, depending on the audience that you’re working with and the
level that you’re working with (Senior Consultant, Consultancy U).
Yes – to suit the need and context of the client, must change it especially the language, need
to remove the jargon (Consultant, Consultancy F).
Although an interesting point was raised regarding the number of reference points
available for public services which was felt to be much lower than for the private
sector. This meant that often material had to be co-developed:
We co-developed the training so that it was fed in the right language and with the right
underpinnings (Senior Consultant, Consultancy C).
Regarding the expectations of the consultant and consultancy the difference in the
attitude towards the consultants was mentioned time and time again. This meant for a
private sector organization staff expected the consultants to deliver hard tangible
benefits, to solve problems, deliver what they promised and work long hours. They
often also had a greater understanding of what and why things needed changing.
Whereas staff in the public sector were much more unsure why the consultants were
there, wanted to learn new skills from the consultants so sometimes saw them as
trainers, wanted the consultants to deliver the change away from them and were not
prepared to give extra hours and time:
It feels to me more like in the private sector they expect you to come in and deliver exactly
what’s been sold to them, delivering all of the tools, the techniques and the training. And
obviously they do have the same expectation in the public sector but they also seem to need, or
want you to, engineer that change. [. . .] Engineer the change and really [. . .] really deliver their
benefits for them. They seem challenged in doing those things for themselves (Managing
Consultant, Consultancy U).
In the private sector they will definitely be expecting me and the delivery team to deliver
results, and, you know, they’d be quite hard-nosed about monitoring that we’re doing that. In
Health, it’s less so [. . .]. and it feels that [. . .]. they are much more interested in building
a relationship with us [. . .]. rather than the commerciality of the relationship (Senior
Consultant, Consultancy F).
Again this raised a tension for the consultants between developing a more sustained
approach through changing behaviours and attitudes as well as, explicitly showing the
benefits of the changes:
IJOPM I think initially maybe private sector looked forward (using us) to help solve the burning platform
not necessarily to engage. Public sector is about skills transfer (Senior Consultant, Consultancy P).
33,11/12
In the private sector, they expect quick results. They would also be far more
benefits-focussed. That’s not to say the public sector isn’t, just that it’s not quite as
patently obvious (Consultant, Consultancy C).

1566 5.3 The client context: differences in public sector consulting work
Each consultant was asked to give up to three differences of selling and implementing
the process management product or offering in private versus public sector
organisations. Table V highlights the differences noted. The table is ordered so that the
difference mentioned the most is at the top and the least at the bottom. The first
difference, pace, was mentioned by just over half of the consultants.

Differences Public Private

Pace and risk Slow/softer Quick/aggressive/demanding

More risk adverse Can be too demanding and too quick
Benefits Focus on quality of service Commercial drive for costs and
“Softer” benefits incentives/deadlines
“Harder” benefits
Understanding of Low level of understanding Higher level of understanding
process management
Selling requirements Focus is around engagement and up Focus is on ensuring the client gets
skilling of the staff return on investment
Span of influence/power Wide, large power structures Senior management/executive team
base consisting of management, usually on site (some if not all the
professional staff and, civil servants time) who have more ability and
leading lots of negotiation, difficulty power to make decisions
in influencing people and,
involvement in the decision making
process
Motivation and Low level of motivation due to level More open to change as more acutely
commitment to change of naivety about the need and focus aware of who their customers are,
of the change the changing need to reinvent
Rework and mistakes are acceptable themselves on a frequent basis,
Staff feel they have a job for life so and the need to be competitive and
are less willing to change have the right quality
Data – collection and Poor quality of data and little Acceptable level of quality of data
use understanding of how to use it
Leadership commitment Unclear who the sponsor is or who is Clearer focus on who is driving and
leading the change responsible for the change
Capability of staff Low levels of capability regarding Higher capability but less desire to
IT (e.g. Excel and PowerPoint), learn more
managing meetings, creating project
Table V. plans, etc.
Most to least frequently Challenging/questioning Low and often they just want to be Questioning and demanding
mentioned differences of of changes told
selling and implementing Understanding the Not clear – multi customers Clear focus on who and what their
operations management customer requirements are
in the public and Building capability and Not many reference points Lots of reference points
private sector understanding in OM
Overall, there was a feeling that the pace of the change in the public sector was a lot Role of
slower and more risk adverse. The consultants felt that when selling and implementing management
process management approaches the focus for public services was much more about
capability building developing knowledge and understanding. Whereas in the private consultancy
sector the demands on the consultants were much higher, in terms of commitment, time
and knowledge with a focus on achieving a tangible return on investment and a impact
on the bottom line. In terms of engagement and implementation within public services it 1567
was much “more about leadership than partnership” – the client wanted to be told what
to do and even shown basics such as IT skills and managing meetings. Many of the
consultants interviewed mentioned the lack of awareness of some of what they described
as the “basic” elements of operations and process management such as defining a
process, the difference between capacity and demand and, even clearly defined
requirements of the customer or the process.
Relating back to the product, even though the consultants said that they wanted the
product to be considered as an offering/philosophy in that it was important to develop
understanding regarding behaviours beyond the tools, in answering the question
regarding the differences they appeared to be frustrated about the level of “softer”
behavioural input they had to give in public services. In particular, they were frustrated
about the engagement with the change by senior managers and leaders who in public
services were perceived to be more detached. Another issue raised was regarding the
outcome – in the private sector the impact was monitored more closely and by more
senior people so it was easier to judge and manage level of success of the consultancy
engagement. Within public services the ability and desire to track benefits was lower
and less interesting to leaders which appeared to have made “selling on” (important to
the consultancy) more difficult.
Overall, as Table V reflects, the consultants’ view which was that although the
impact in the public sector was greater in terms of engaging staff and changing their
behaviours, there were frustrations regarding the ability to measure or account for the
level of impact or even influence the wider picture. Also the ability to implement
the changes in practices originally planned or promised were not always possible
due to the understanding of the staff, commitment of the leadership and span of
control.
When asked what the sustainability of the process management product would be
in the public service the consultants recognized that they had an impact on some of the
processes when they were present especially regarding time reduction and quality
improvement but they also felt that regarding overall impact in terms of the offering
was limited. Sustainability and developing the product further was really about having
really strong local leadership which was often felt to be lacking:
It’s a lot to do with the people that are involved in the Continuous Improvement team that you
work with as you go through the journey internally, as to you know their networks, their
ability to engage. It’s a lot to do with the senior team and how they communicate and engage
down and whether they’re taking feedback up (Partner, Consultancy C).
I think the main success factor is probably the leadership, which is actually one of the
challenges in the leadership and commitment to it [. . .] but that’s where the sustainability will
come from (Consultant, Consultancy C).
IJOPM 6. Discussion
33,11/12 This paper has presented a situation where the focus on the efficiency agenda within
the public sector has led to a real rise in the trend to use operation and process
management practices. To date, compared with private, there is still little written on
operations management within the public sector and what there is, is mainly with
regard to health (Brandao de Souza, 2009; Radnor et al., 2012). Operations and process
1568 management in the public sector could be considered as a new and emerging field with
the current agenda about needing to educate and develop public services professionals
and managers on the effective use of OM to support effective service delivery.

6.1 Differences between public and private operations management consultancy

In terms of the two research questions the first asked “how do operation management
consultancy interventions in the public sector differ to those in the private sector?” The
research found real differences between private and public sectors in terms of how
consultancies sell work in and how they work with and manage the expectations of the
clients. Consultants themselves noticed that whilst implementations varied, for example,
in terms of the language used and the material deployed, many felt that the essence of the
offering was not amended significantly. Yet language is important. In other studies of
consultancy services, language has been shown to be crucial in translating the
consultancy “idea” into an attractive proposition (Clark et al., 2002; Grint and Case, 2002).
Indeed, the ambiguity inherent in consultancy propositions has been argued to be crucial
in their successful application in a wide range of settings (Giroux, 2006).
There appears also to be a tension regarding the role of the management
consultant – although they enjoyed the level of influence within public services there
was frustration over the degree of their impact (especially at senior level) in relation to
what they experienced in private organisations. This was felt to be because of the lack
of leadership engagement and the low starting point of the engagement in terms of at
times having to teach some “basic” elements of operations management.
These tensions and frustrations felt are not unusual and have been noted in process
improvement literature as “barriers”. Some of the barriers noted could be described as
“common” for most operations management initiatives, e.g. lack of commitment from
senior management, objectives that are not aligned to customer requirements, a lack of
training for staff and poor selection of projects (Lucey et al., 2005; Radnor et al., 2006;
Antony, 2007; Oakland and Tanner, 2007). However, there are some specific public
sector barriers which appear to have impacted on operations management consultancy
engagements and can be summarised as public sector culture and structure, lack of
client understanding of business issues, and low levels of investment.
6.1.1 Public sector culture and structure. The political and financial environment
public sector organisations operate in can have adverse effects on operations and
process improvement programmes. An example given by Blair and Taylor (1998)
includes a public sector service, whose need for change arose out of low customer
satisfaction due to inefficient processes clogging up the supply chain. However,
technical, financial and political restraints led to only a hybrid version of the old and new
system being implemented. Political issues and decision making meant that, even
though employees felt that they were not “being done to”, they still had vested interest in
preserving as much of the status quo as possible and suggested modifications were
conservative (Blair and Taylor, 1998).
 The sectoral specific issues can impact upon the success of implementations in the Role of
public sector. McNulty (2003) notes that across public sector organisations as a whole, management
policy and decision making is focused at the macro level and undertaken by officials,
whereas practice and delivery occurs at the micro level by professionals (e.g. clinicians, consultancy
academics, etc.). He describes how professional work is broken down into specialities
that very rarely cross-departmental boundaries. However, professionals control the flow
of work and are therefore very powerful and can resist managerial attempts to make 1569
their work more predictable, transparent and standard (McNulty, 2003). Gulledge et al.
(2002) point out the mandates and structure of the implementation of improvement
methodologies are based on traditional “command and control” structures. The
environment often driven by policy and spending reviews means the requirement to
engage with operations and process management and other concepts is driven from
policy and not necessarily customer facing. This structure means that operations and
process improvement may not be effective as frontline staff react to the managers,
measures and targets rather than the customers (Gulledge et al., 2002).
If we consider this in relation to the findings and the differences between private and
public sector presented in Table II it was noted that at comparing the two sectors, “from
the bottom up” at a basic level, managerial requirements are similar between the two
sectors. However, from a “top-down” perspective, democratic values,
ministerial/politics, laws and rights, etc. shape a much different picture of managerial
requirements. This appears to be holding true in terms of the findings from this research
regarding management consultancy engagement, i.e. consultants are finding that they
are able to impact the operations management elements at the process or even
operational level but are struggling to engage and sustain engagement at a strategic
level. The consultants felt that the clients had a mixed understanding of the purpose,
focus of the change and customer requirements often due to the lack of leadership for the
process and operations management implementation.
6.1.2 Lack of client understanding. A lack of client understanding was mentioned by
the management consultants interviewed as problematic in implementing successful
projects, especially with regard to understanding the process, customer and the type of
demand for public services. Within the literature, challenges to implementing operations
and process management (particularly Lean) in government organisations have been
noted to include: no guarantee of top level ownership of processes due to political
leadership being transitory, top level managers having little understanding of front line
processes and no single definition of who the customer is and what their requirements
are (Krings et al., 2006). Proudlove et al. (2008, p. 33) summarise that “of particular
significance to Lean are the difficulties in identifying customers and processes in
a healthcare setting and the use of clear and appropriate terminology”. It is also difficult
to specify value in the public sector because some organisational functions and
procedures do not contribute to value in the eyes of the customer (Halachmi, 1996). It also
claimed that in managing and delivering public services processes across organisational
functions can be difficult, because of departmental working and a lack of alignment
between business processes and IT (Gulledge and Sommer, 2002).
Seddon and Brand (2008) outline two different types of demand – value demand
(“what we are here to provide”) and failure demand (“failure to do something or do
something right for the customer”). They report that in local government departments
the level of failure demand can be as high as 80 per cent. Understanding the type and
IJOPM patterns of demand can mean the system and capacity can be designed to meet the
33,11/12 demand thus reducing backlog and queues. Understanding demand and variation in
public services and service as a whole is not as easy as in manufacturing but authors
such as Spear (2005) assure us that it is possible if the changes and improvements are
made in manageable chunks.
6.1.3 Low investment levels. Regarding sustainability, the findings indicated that as
1570 well as lack of leadership engagement there was a lack of understanding by senior
leaders of the time and resources needed to transfer knowledge. This was related to the
top “difference” in Table V where the consultants mentioned that leaders were not
prepared to take risks. By not investing in resources there is a danger of a short-term
view of operations and process improvement focusing around particular departments
and functional processes. MacIntosh (2003) noted that in public services too many
resources may be required and as a result corners may be cut. In comparing resources
available to fund process improvement implementations, he outlined huge differences
between the public and private sectors. These ranged from the private sector spending
of millions of pounds to buy the required equipment to a lack of financial resources in
the public sector in order to implement the required solution (MacIntosh, 2003).
Additionally, high levels of investment have to be justified and monitored for benefits
realisation or “value for money”. However, the second major “difference” in Table V lists
“benefits” in terms of public services being more focused on “softer” rather than “harder”
results. For consultancies this can be frustrating as it is then more difficult to justify the
impact and result of the intervention. This finding is supported from the public sector
literature where it is noted that very little is written about what and how benefit tracking
systems should be developed, implemented and used (Radnor, 2010).
Some writers have noted that there is a perception that operations and process
management practices are manufacturing-based and so are not applicable within the
specific public sector environments (Bane, 2002). Others have noted that within public
services there can be an unwillingness to use external/private sector support (Radnor,
2010). Obviously, this was not the case for the organisations which the management
consultants were engaged with at a senior level but could have been an issue with the
middle management and frontline staff whom the consultants had to deal with on a
more regular basis. For them the reluctance to use external support may be that, other
people from outside the sector would not understand their organisation. This may
illustrate that managers and staff in the public sector view their organisation not as a
system but as an entity which can only learn from a similar form (e.g. another local
authority).

6.2 How public sector context influences operations management consultancy

The second research question asked, “how does the public sector context influence the
development of operations management consulting?”. Given both the importance of
client demands to the generation and structuring of consultancy knowledge
(Morris, 2001) and the clear differences outlined above between the public and
private sectors, it is perhaps to be expected that these different contexts will impact the
ways in which consultancies both develop relationships with clients and develop their
service propositions. Yet, as we saw earlier, the main thrust of academic research in
this area considers only the flow of knowledge from consultants to clients rather than
vice versa. A central contribution of this paper, which builds upon the findings detailed
above, is to show how the different context of the public sector generates different Role of
expectations and interactions of consultants and clients, which in turn has an impact management
on the ways in which consultancies create and generate management knowledge.
Thus, in addition to the flow of knowledge outlined in Table III which prioritises the consultancy
effect of consultancies on clients, we would argue that there is a reciprocal movement
of knowledge about experiences in the client context which influences both the
relationship of clients and consultants and the development of services within the 1571
consultancy (Table VI).
Thus, in these cases, it is possible to evidence the impact of a different public sector
environment not simply on the implementation itself, but also on the consultant-client
relationship and subsequently on the development of services specifically for the public
sector. Central processes here include the role of procurement, which tends to lead to more
commodified, simpler services designed to compete on cost, the lower skill of client staff
which often leads to services designed with skills transfer built in, and finally risk adverse
decision making which tends to mitigate against innovative, untested services. This
finding building upon the work which stresses the importance of “horizon scanning”
activities by consultancies (Heusinkveld et al., 2009) to show how the public sector context
changes the processes by which management knowledge is generated and disseminated.

7. Conclusion
This paper aims at highlighting the changing face of operations and process management
consultancy through an analysis of the growing trend of its use in the public sector.
Rather than consider the implementation within one particular public service this research
has given an insight from the perspective of management consultants who are in position to
compare and contrast their experiences of implementing similar operations management
practices across the private and public organisations. To better understand new trends in
operations management this paper asked two questions: “how do operations management
consultancy interventions in the public sector differ to those in the private sector?” And
“how does the public sector context influence the development of operations management
consulting?”. With regard to the first question, the findings indicate that although
consultants aim to implement the same overarching offering, there are some key tensions in
the implementation of services in the public sector. Interestingly, many of these tensions

Service Development Relationships Client Contexts

Focus How service development is How client relationships are How experiences and lessons
impacted by different types of moulded by different contexts in different client contexts
clients influence the consultancy
Key Less risky, innovative Multi-stakeholder More bureaucratic structures Table VI.
points services relationships Risk adverse decision making A three-stage model for
Focus on skills transfer and More transactional, less Lower skill staff examining the impact of
capacity development conversational Lower clarity of benefits public sector clients on
A focus on cost Enhanced role of procurement realisation and goals consultancy service
Co-development of material Use of e-procurement development
IJOPM could be argued to relate to the fundamentals of operations management in that they refer to
33,11/12 the design, planning and control and improvement of processes. Others are much wider in
terms of cultural differences related to pace, commitment of leaders and ability to track the
impact. With regard to the second question, the paper showed how the differing context of
public sector OM implementations has an effect “down-stream” on both the consultant-client
relationship and the development of OM services within the consultancy. This finding, it
1572 was argued, is important within the context of the management knowledge literature, which
tends to focus on the impact of the consultant on the client, rather than the other way around.
This paper suggests that the tensions could be addressed by developing and creating
a greater understanding of the factors around readiness and success for implementing
operations management in the context of public services. Cinite et al. (2009, p. 274) in
their study on organisational readiness in the public sector found that organisations:
[. . .] should pay close attention to the behaviours of their leaders, change agents, immediate
supervisors at all levels, organisational practices around the change, and how these practices
impact people’s daily work.
Other authors have found organisational readiness related to antecedents such as
flexible policies and procedures (Eby et al., 2000), resource levels and personality
attributes of leaders (Lehman et al., 2002). Whilst interesting what is relevant regarding
organisational readiness when considering the implementation of OM in public services
is the concept that the change is not just about the practice itself (in terms of its content)
but also about engaging with and initiating change in the organisations context,
structure and capacity to successfully allow the practice to be implemented. Thus, in
seeking to overcome some of the barriers outlined earlier, organisational readiness
develops some understanding of the “basic” elements which relate to the elements of OM,
i.e. understanding how to design processes and systems, defining what the process is,
what the demand types and patterns so effective planning and control can take place are
as well as linking process improvement activity to strategy (Radnor, 2010).
From the evidence presented here it is apparent that the public sector understanding
of operations management concepts are fairly low but where engagement with them is
taking place the impact is high (Radnor, 2010). Theoretically, there is little doubt for the
need of operations and process management approaches within public services in order
to address the growing demands for efficiency and effectiveness. However, in practice
due to the complexities of power, span of influence and political leadership, the ability
and opportunity for operations and process management to have real impact may be
limited (Allison, 1997; Box, 1999). This research contributes to practice by suggesting
that management consultants may have to change the focus of their engagement to take
into account not only the operational level but also the network or strategic level.
However, due to the political nature of decision making within public services coupled
with the lack of leadership the challenges of this transition do not make it a lucrative
prospect! The research also indicates that management consultants may need to manage
the expectations of both their engagement time and the clients requirements
more clearly. For example, the research strongly indicates that for some engagements
there was a need to explicitly include training to develop the clients understanding of
“basic” operations management concepts. They also need to be more sensitive to the
public sector context in terms of the policy environment and so need to influence how
benefits are measured and tracked. If the trend of using management consultants
to implement operation and process management in public services is set to continue Role of
then this research indicates that management consultancies need to better suit the management
development, delivery and management of their products and services.
The paper contributes to the discipline of operations management by drawing in consultancy
other literature to develop the theoretical underpinning for the subject. Here, concepts
and theories from knowledge production and consumption have been used to enhance
our understanding of how operations management and management consultancy are 1573
related in the public sector. The research has not only used this to help frame the research
but has also contributed to the knowledge management literature by illustrating how the
context of the “consumer” of knowledge can have an important effect on the activities of
the “producer”. This relationship needs to be investigated further by interviewing not
only management consultants but also a selection of public sector managers and
procurers. This may lead to the development of the theory further by indicating a
bi-directional relationship between service development, relationships and client
context. We have also shown that, in our cases, the pressures of cost meant that
procurers often exerted commodifying tendencies on the product development of
consultancies. It may prove fruitful to compare whether, and how, similar innovations
are commodified differently for the private and public sectors.
There are also implications for the operations management academic community.
As constant users of public services it is important for us to find knowledge and
frameworks to support both public service managers and management consultants in
developing an understanding of operations management for the public sector. This
needs to include carrying out research on the type and impact of operations management
across the wider public sector (e.g. justice, revenue and tax, local government, police),
considering the role of management consultants, as well as drawing on other literature to
create a wider reference set of operations management for public sector organisations.
The current agenda in the UK focuses on significant spending cuts in public services
with the “more with less” rhetoric providing an opportunity for operations management
to be fully embraced within the public sector. The findings of this paper illustrate the
tensions and frustrations that exist in achieving this but also give some insights to
support the operations management community in understanding how the
development, production and consumption of knowledge is influenced by public
sector contexts.

References
Allison, G.T. (1997), “Public and private management: are they fundamentally alike in all
unimportant respects?”, in Shafritz, J.M. and Hyde, A.C. (Eds), Classics of Public
Administration, Dorsey Press, Chicago, IL, pp. 383-400.
Alvesson, M., Kärreman, D., Sturdy, A. and Handley, K. (2009), “Unpacking the client(s):
constructions, positions and client-consultant dynamics”, Scandinavian Journal of
Management, Vol. 25, pp. 253-263.
Antony, J. (2007), “Is Six Sigma a management fad or fact?”, Assembly Automation, Vol. 27 No. 1,
pp. 17-19.
Bane, R. (2002), “Leading edge quality approaches in non-manufacturing organisations”,
Proceedings of the Annual Quality Congress, Denver, CO, Vol. 56, ASQ, Milwaukee, WI,
pp. 245-249.
IJOPM Benders, J., van den Berg, R.-J. and van Bijsterveld, M. (1998), “Hitch-hiking on a hype: Dutch
consultants engineering re-engineering”, Journal of Organizational Change Management,
33,11/12 Vol. 11 No. 3, pp. 201-215.
Blair, H. and Taylor, S. (1998), “A pernicious panacea: a critical evaluation of business
re-engineering”, New Technology, Work & Employment, Vol. 13 No. 2, pp. 116-129.
Box, R.C. (1999), “Running government like a business: implications for public administration
1574 theory and practice”, American Review of Public Administration, Vol. 29 No. 1, pp. 19-43.
Boyne, G.A. (2002), “Public and private management: what’s the difference?”, Journal of
Management Studies, Vol. 39 No. 1, pp. 97-122.
Boyne, G.A., Farrell, C., Law, J., Powell, M. and Walker, R. (2003), Evaluating Public Sector
Reforms, Open University Press, Buckingham.
Brandao de Souza, L. (2009), “Trends and approaches in lean healthcare”, Leadership in Health
Services, Vol. 22 No. 2, pp. 121-139.
Christensen, M. (2005), “The ‘third hand’: private sector consultants in public sector accounting
change”, European Accounting Review, Vol. 14 No. 3, pp. 447-474.
Cinite, I., Duxbury, L.E. and Higgins, C. (2009), “Measurement of perceived organizational readiness
for change in the public sector”, British Academy of Management, Vol. 20, pp. 265-277.
Clark, T. (2004), “The fashion of management fashion: a surge too far?”, Organization, Vol. 11,
pp. 297-306.
Clark, T. and Salaman, G. (1996), “The management guru as organizational witchdoctor”,
Organization, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 85-107.
Clegg, S.R., Kornberger, M. and Rhodes, C. (2004), “Noise, parasites and translation: theory and
practice in management consulting”, Management Learning, Vol. 35, pp. 31-44.
Craig, D. and Brooks, R. (2006), Plundering the Public Sector, Constable, London.
Davies, S. (2007), Third Sector Provision of Local Government and Health Services, UNISON,
London.
Diefenbach, T. (2009), “New public management in public sector organisations: the dark sides of
managerialistic ‘enlightenment’”, Public Administration, Vol. 87 No. 4, pp. 892-909.
Drucker, P.F. (1993), Post-capitalist Society, HarperBusiness, New York, NY.
Eby, L.T., Adams, D.M., Russell, E.A. and Gaby, S.H. (2000), “Perceptions of organizational
readiness for change: factors related to employees’ reactions to the implementation of
team-based selling”, Human Relations, Vol. 53, pp. 419-442.
Eisenhardt, K.M. (1989), “Building theories from case study research”, Academy of Management
Review, Vol. 14 No. 4, pp. 532-550.
Fillingham, D. (2007), “Can lean save lives”, Leadership in Health Services, Vol. 20 No. 4,
pp. 231-241.
Fincham, R. (1995), “Business process reengineering and the commodification of managerial
knowledge”, Journal of Marketing Management, Vol. 11, pp. 707-719.
Fincham, R. (1999), “The consultant-client relationship: critical perspectives on the management
of organizational change”, Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 36, pp. 335-351.
Fincham, R. and Roslender, R. (2004), “Rethinking the dissemination of management fashion”,
Management Learning, Vol. 35 No. 3, pp. 321-336.
Fosstenløkken, S.M., Løwendahl, B.R. and Revang, Ø. (2003), “Knowledge development through
client interaction: a comparative study”, Organization Studies, Vol. 24 No. 6, pp. 859-880.
Furusten, S. and Werr, A. (2005), Dealing with Confidence: The Construction of Need and Trust in Role of
Management Adviseory Services, Copenhegen Business School Press, Copenhagen, p. 269.
management
Gershon, P. (2004), Releasing Resources to the Front Line: Independent Review of Public Sector
Efficiency, HM Treasury, London. consultancy
Giroux, H. (2006), “It was such a handy term: management fashions and pragmatic ambiguity”,
Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 43 No. 6.
Good, D.A. (2004), The Politics of Public Management, IPAC, Toronto. 1575
Grint, K. and Case, P. (2002), “The violent rhetoric of re-engineering: management consultancy on
the offensive”, Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 35 No. 5.
Gross, A. and Poor, J. (2008), “The global management consultancy sector”, Business Economics,
Vol. 43 No. 4, pp. 59-68.
Gulledge, T.R. Jr and Sommer, R.A. (2002), “Business process management: public sector
implications”, Business Process Management Journal, Vol. 8 No. 4, pp. 364-376.
Guthrie, J. (2006), “The joys of a health service driven by Toyota”, Financial Times, 22 June.
Haas, M.R. (2006), “Acquiring and applying knowledge in transnational teams – the roles of
cosmopolitans and locals”, Organization Science, Vol. 17 No. 3, pp. 367-384.
Halachmi, A. (1996), “Business process reengineering in the public sector: trying to get another
frog to fly”, National Productivity Review, Vol. 15 No. 3, pp. 9-18.
Heusinkveld, S. and Benders, J. (2005), “Contested commodification: consultancies and their
struggle with new concept development”, Human Relations, Vol. 58 No. 3, pp. 283-310.
Heusinkveld, S., Benders, J. and Van den Berg, R.-J. (2009), “From market sensing to new concept
developments in consultancies: the role of information processing and organizational
capabilities”, Technovation, Vol. 29 No. 8, pp. 509-516.
Hislop, D. (2002), “The client role in consultancy relations during the appropriation of
technological innovations”, Research Policy, Vol. 31, pp. 657-671.
HM Treasury (2008), Operational Efficiency Programme: Prospectus, HM Treasury, London.
HM Treasury (2009), Operational Efficiency Programme: Final Report, HM Treasury, London.
Johnson, H.T. and Broms, A. (2000), Profit Beyond Measure, The Free Press, New York, NY.
Kelly, G., Mulgan, G. and Muers, S. (2002), Creating Public Value – An Analytical Framework for
Public Service Reform, U.G. Cabinet Office, London.
Kennedy Information (2008), The Global Consulting Marketplace: Key Data, Forecasts and
Trends, Kennedy Information Inc., Fitzwilliam, NH.
Krings, D., Levine, D. and Wall, T. (2006), “The use of ‘lean’ in local government”, Public
Management, Vol. 88 No. 8, pp. 12-17.
Lapsley, I. and Oldfield, R. (2001), “Transforming the public sector: management consultants as
agents of change”, European Accounting Review, Vol. 10 No. 3, pp. 523-543.
Lehman, W.E.K., Greener, J.M. and Simpson, D.D.D. (2002), “Assessing organizational readiness
for change”, Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, Vol. 22, pp. 197-209.
Levitt, T. (1972), “Production-line approach to service”, Harvard Business Review,
September/October, pp. 41-52.
Llewellyn, S. and Tappin, E. (2003), “Strategy in the public sector: management in the
wilderness”, Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 40, pp. 955-982.
Lucey, J., Bateman, N. and Hines, P. (2005), “Why major lean transitions have not been
sustained”, Management Services, Vol. 49, pp. 9-13.
IJOPM McNulty, T. (2003), “Redesigning public services: challenges of practice for policy”, British
Journal of Management, Vol. 14, S1, pp. 31-45.
33,11/12 MacGregor, D. (2001), “Jobs in the public and private sectors”, Economic Trends, Vol. 571,
pp. 35-40.
MacIntosh, R. (2003), “BPR alive and well in the public sector”, International Journal of
Operations & Production Management, Vol. 23 No. 3, pp. 327-344.
1576 Massey, A. (2005), The State of Britain: A Guide to the UK Public Sector, Public Management and
Policy Association, London.
MCA (2006), Ensuring Sustainable Value from Consultants, Management Consultancies
Association Report, London.
MCA (2010), The Consulting Industry, Report for the Management Consultancies Association,
London.
Morris, T. (2001), “Asserting property rights: knowledge codification in the professional service
firm”, Human Relations, Vol. 54, pp. 819-838.
National Audit Office (2006), Central Government’s Use of Consultants, National Audit Office,
London.
Nicolai, A.T., Schulz, A.-C. and Thomas, T.W. (2010), “What wall street wants – exploring the
role of security analysts in the evolution and spread of management concepts”, Journal of
Management Studies, Vol. 47 No. 1, pp. 162-189.
Oakland, J.S. and Tanner, S.J. (2007), Lean in Government: Tips and Trips, Oakland Consulting
White Paper.
Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (2005), A Systematic Approach to Service Improvement,
Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, London.
O’Mahoney, J. (2007), “The diffusion of management innovations: the possibilities and limitations
of memetics”, Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 43 No. 8.
Pollitt, C. and Bouckaert, G. (2004), Public Management Reform: A Comparative Analysis, Oxford
University Press, Oxford.
Proudlove, N., Moxham, C. and Boaden, R. (2008), “Lessons for lean in healthcare from using
Six Sigma in the NHS”, Public Money & Management, Vol. 28 No. 1, pp. 27-34.
Public Accounts Committee (2007), Assessing the Value for Money of OGC Buying Solutions,
Treasury, London, pp. 5-7.
Radnor, H. (2002), Researching Your Own Professional Practice: Doing Interpretive Research,
Oxford University Press, Buckingham.
Radnor, Z.J. (2010), Review of Business Process Improvement Methodologies in Public Services,
Advanced Instituite of Management Research, London.
Radnor, Z.J. and Boaden, R. (2008), “Lean in public services – panacea or paradox?”, Public Money
& Management, Vol. 28 No. 1, pp. 3-7.
Radnor, Z.J. and Bucci, G. (2007), Evaluation of Pacesetter: Lean Senior Leadership and
Operational Management, Within HMRC Processing, HM Revenues and Customs, London.
Radnor, Z.J. and Walley, P. (2008), “Learning to walk before we try to run: adapting lean for the
public sector”, Public Money and Management, Vol. 28, pp. 13-20.
Radnor, Z.J., Holweg, M. and Waring, J. (2012), “Lean in healthcare: the unfilled promise?”, Social
Science & Medicine, Vol. 74 No. 3, pp. 364-371.
Radnor, Z.J., Walley, P., Stephens, A. and Bucci, G. (2006), Evaluation of the Lean Approach to
Business Management and Its Use in the Public Sector, Scottish Government Social
Research, Edinburgh.
Rainey, H.G., Backoff, R.W. and Levine, C.N. (1976), “Comparing public and private Role of
organizations”, Public Administration Review, March/April, pp. 233-244.
management
Saint-Martin, D. (2000), Building the New Managerialist State: Consultants and the Politics of
Public Sector Reform in Comparative Perspective, Oxford University Press, Oxford. consultancy
Saint-Martin, D. (2004), Building the New Managerialist State Consultants and the Politics of
Public Sector Reform in Comparative Perspective, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Savoie, D.J. (2003), Breaking the Bargain, University of Toronto Press, Toronto. 1577
Seddon, J. and Brand, C. (2008), “Debate: systems thinking and public sector performance”, Public
Money & Management, Vol. 28 No. 1, pp. 7-10.
Silvester, K., Lendon, R., Bevan, H., Steyn, R. and Walley, P. (2004), “Reducing waiting times in
the NHS: is lack of capacity the problem?”, Clinician in Management, Vol. 12 No. 3,
pp. 105-111.
Smith, P. (1995), “On the unintended consequences of publishing performance data in the public
sector”, International Journal of Public Administration, Vol. 18 Nos 2/3, pp. 277-310.
Spear, S.J. (2005), “Fixing health care from the inside, today”, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 83,
p. 78.
Steward, J. and Walsh, K. (1994), “Performance measurement: when performance can never be
finally defined”, Public Money & Management, Vol. 14 No. 2, pp. 45-49.
Sturdy, A., Handley, K., Clark, T. and Fincham, R. (2009), Management Consultancy: Boundaries
and Knowledge in Action, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Suddaby, R. and Greenwood, R. (2001), “Colonizing knowledge – commodification as a dynamic
of jurisdictional expansion in professional service firms”, Human Relations, Vol. 54 No. 7,
pp. 933-953.
Swank, C.K. (2003), “The lean service machine”, Harvard Business Review, October.
Taylor, A. and Taylor, M. (2009), “Operations management research: contemporary themes,
trends and potential future directions”, International Journal of Operations & Production
Management, Vol. 29 No. 12, pp. 1316-1340.
Voss, C., Tsikriktsis, N. and Frohlich, M. (2002), “Case research in operations
management”, International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 22
No. 2, pp. 195-219.
Waterson, P. and Clegg, C. (1997), The Use and Effectiveness of Modern Manufacturing Practices
in the United Kingdom, Institute of Work Psychology, Sheffield.
Whittle, A. (2006), “The paradoxical repertoires of management consultancy”, Journal of
Organizational Change Management, Vol. 19 No. 4, pp. 424-443.
Williams, W. and Lewis, D. (2008), “Strategic management tools and public sector
management: the challenge of context specificity”, Public Management Review, Vol. 10
No. 5, pp. 653-671.
Wright, C. and Kitay, J. (2004), “Spreading the word: gurus, consultants and the diffusion of the
employee relations paradigm in Australia”, Management Learning, Vol. 35, pp. 271-286.
Yin, R.K. (1993), Applications of Case Study Research, Sage, London.

Further reading
Clark, T. and Greatbach, D. (2002), “Knowledge legitimation and audience affiliation through
storytelling: the example of management gurus”, in Clark, T. and Fincham, R. (Eds),
Critical Consulting, Blackwell, Oxford.
IJOPM About the authors
Zoe Radnor is a Professor of operations management. Her area of interest is in performance and
33,11/12 process improvement and management in public services. Until recently, Zoe was a Management
Practice Advanced Institute of Management (AIM) Fellow considering sustainability of Lean in
public services. She has led research projects for the Scottish Executive, HM Revenue and
Customs, HM Court Services, HealthCare, Local Government and Higher Education
organisations which have evaluated how “Lean” techniques are and could be used in the
1578 public sector. She has developed a House of Lean for Public Services. She has published over
60 articles, book chapters and reports as well as presented widely on the topic to both academic
and practitioner audiences. Zoe also advises and sits on a number of boards and committees for
organisations such as the Welsh Assembly Government, National Audit Office and Cabinet
Office. Zoe Radnor is the corresponding author and can be contacted at: [email protected]
Joe O’Mahoney during his PhD performed consultancy work for several clients and on
passing his viva, moved into the consulting industry where he specialised in change
management. His projects included process re-engineering, culture change, IT implementation
and strategy work for BAE, Barclays, Energis and the Bank of Scotland. He then ran an internal
consultancy team designing Europe’s largest start-up company, Three. After helping launch
Three, Joe returned to academia. Joe’s research focuses on critical management studies: the
application of sociological theory to organisations and their inhabitants. In recent years, he has
studied the institution of ethics in the management consulting industry, trust and anxiety in
organisational change: critical realist approaches and the evolution of management ideas using
memetics. Joe was awarded a Management Practices Fellowship by the Advanced Institute of
Management (AIM).

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: [email protected]

Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints

View publication stats